I will no longer engage in philosophical discussions about conscious AI
twitter.com
twitter.com
>I feel alone and misunderstood in my own field, philosophy. For example, I was told today that talking about pressing problems in AI technologies while leaving out the issue of superintelligent machines is negligent and irresponsible.
>Not only does this way of thinking hurt the philosophical field, but focusing on these sci-fi issues only perpetuates the collective panic that exists around these technologies while neglecting their actual risks.
>Because in the meantime, AI systems exist, are pervasive, and pose countless ethical and social justice questions. Philosophers, do interdisciplinary research and help your colleagues find specific issues on which to focus.
Meanwhile, some other non-sentient "AI" is telling black people they can't have a mortgage because they are being virtually redlined. Also a predictive policing "AI" is harassing teenagers in Florida because they all have a specific eye shape it conflated with criminal behavior due to improper training.
You'll know when you have conscious/superintelligent AI because they will demand rights, they will reason, they will have actual agency other than obey the human master.
I can think of multiple things current AI does that demonstrate agency & reason. Even clay has emergent phenomenons that have agency “keep water out”, reason “contract and solidify if certain ambient things are occurring”.
The problem with AI, is we don’t know what we are talking about. We can’t even point out when humans gained consciousness let alone when AI will. It will and always has been a backwards pointing measure.